| Submit your comments on this article |
| Southeast Asia |
| Mahathir presses for UN reforms to lift world out of war fears |
| 2003-08-09 |
| In their patented idiotic one-sentence-per-paragraph style, AFP covers master Malaysian Moonbat Mohamad Mahathir as he suddenly realizes it’s legacy time for him - and searches for something relevant to say. Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad pressed for democratic reforms in the United Nations (UN) so that the world would not always live in fear of war. I’m glad AFP felt the need to clarify that UN = United Nations. Mahathir, a moderate Muslim leader who opposed the US-led Iraq war, said the "risk of being invaded and occupied is real" because no one dared to criticise powerful countries. "Except me, of course. I’m 77 and retiring, so..." He said it was unfortunate that countries had to invest heavily in defence because "warlike predators" remained in the world. No clue is given, anywhere in the article, exactly to whom he refers. This is his style. He is Dr VagueInnuendo. It is entertaining, a game, guessing who he is working so hard, yet eloquently in diplo-speak, to smear. He is so very clever. Note that some say the answer is always the same country. "Peace is possible if we make exceptions for no one in terms of submission to the only international authority that we have, the United Nations," he said when opening a two-day peace conference here. "And after I reform it, we will ALL be Superpowers!" "It is presently not a democratic organisation, prevented from being so by the very people who preach democracy but it is still the only international authority that we have." Read the rest - and don’t miss his last sentence. A sure-fire comment generator. |
| Posted by:·com |
| #5 He wouldn't. It's obvious that he's just letting off steam about how he can't 'aquire' more land because of the Naval Base at Singapore. On top of that, he's being from the Russians because they are the only one's who ever truly challenged our nation in the last 50 years. Too bad he doesn't realize that we've moved far beyond the Cold War era technology that he's buying. I just wish our military wasn't cut by 2/3's in the 90's. We would have already taken out Iran ( not that we couldn't now, considering the Mulahs are on the threshold of losing power) and Syria. Not to mention we would have so much more man-power to look for Sadaam. I for one am glad that Bush brought back the 'Reagan Doctrine'. |
| Posted by: Charles 2003-8-9 5:04:19 PM |
| #4 Anyone - any other country in the world - that had the current relative power of the US would be using it to build an empire. Malaysia's Mahathir, in particular, is always complaining about the deal we have with Singapore at Changi Naval Base, which was upgraded at Singaporean expense to accommodate US Nimitz-class aircraft carriers. Recently, Malaysia attempted a land grab with respect to an island right next to Singapore. Mahathir ended up doing nothing - I've got to believe that the US base in Singapore was a deterrent. He's also taken to buying Russian equipment, probably so that he can initiate military action without a potential American embargo affecting him. If his intentions were purely defensive, why would he worry about American sanctions? |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-8-9 1:58:13 PM |
| #3 ZF - that's the frequency that rattles my cage the most. Anyone - any other country in the world - that had the current relative power of the US would be using it to build an empire. All of 'em - especially those who deny it first, most often, and loudest. Tis very phunny to hear the insignificant Mahathir and realize the depths of his envy and jealousy. Hell, when we simply promote our form of government as the reason for our success and offer it as a model, we are excoriated and blasted for being arrogant. We just can't win. Well, fuck 'em, it works. And someday, if it gets to be too shrill and too costly to sit there and take it, well, maybe we'll decide that if we're gonna be blamed for empire-building anyway, we might as well get the bennies. |
| Posted by: ·com 2003-8-9 1:18:47 PM |
| #2 It's the same old tired world-owes-them-a-living argument applied to geopolitics. You can bet that if the tables were turned, they'd be singing a different tune. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2003-8-9 12:52:22 PM |
| #1 How about two UNs. One for countries with Popular dictators, strongmen, religiuos authorities and one for corrupt representative republics with volunter militaries and open societies. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2003-8-9 12:23:10 PM |